https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42788 Refund claims for excise duty paid by mistake of law were treated differently depending on the forum and source of power. The departmental refund authority could act only within Section 11-B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, so a claim filed beyond the statutory period could not be entertained by the Assistant Collector. By contrast, a broader restitutionary claim against the Union of India was recognised where duty was collected without authority of law, relying on Article 265 of the Constitution and Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The article notes that such a claim was not confined to Section 11-B and could be pursued against the Government. en-us Tue, 27 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Jun 2010 12:47:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42788 Refund claims for excise duty paid by mistake of law were treated differently depending on the forum and source of power. The departmental refund authority could act only within Section 11-B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, so a claim filed beyond the statutory period could not be entertained by the Assistant Collector. By contrast, a broader restitutionary claim against the Union of India was recognised where duty was collected without authority of law, relying on Article 265 of the Constitution and Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The article notes that such a claim was not confined to Section 11-B and could be pursued against the Government. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Feb 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42788